RésuméDans un article publié dans Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 22, p. 217–87 par Gad Freudenthal et Mauro Zonta, les auteurs annoncent “un tableau préliminaire mais complet de la réception d'Avicenne, en arabe et en hébreu, dans les cultures juives médiévales”, et fournissent en effet, semble-t-il, cet “examen complet” que Zonta appelait de ses vœux en conclusion de son étude fondamentale et incontournable, “Avicenna in medieval Jewish philosophy”. Zonta expliquait qu'un “examen complet des diverses interprétations consacrées par les penseurs juifs à (...) ses doctrines nous permettrait d’évaluer le rôle véritable qu'[Avicenne] a joué dans l'histoire de la pensée médiévale”. Curieusement, cet article n'apporte que peu de nouveauté aux études qui ont été précédemment offertes par Zonta et d'autres auteurs sur le sujet, et omet d'importantes informations contenues dans ces mêmes études. La présente contribution se propose de corriger plusieurs affirmations réductrices, des présupposés discutables et des observations erronées que renferme l'article en question. Elle souhaiterait ainsi aider le lecteur à se faire une idée meilleure et plus précise – mais certainement pas “complète” – de la réception d'Avicenne dans le monde Juif médiéval. (shrink)

Averrocrit trois genres de commentaires sur les livres d'Aristote - s, commentaires moyens et grands commentaires - et dans chaque genre il poursuivait un dessein diffrer d'un texte uvres logiques que, par exemple, dans les taphysiques. Cette aspects th des commentaires d'Averrol savoir le Commentaire moyen aux Premiers Analytiques. Les Premiers Analytiques sont peut-dant, de tous les 'Aristote, et des trois genres de commentaires d'Averrocarter. La seule trace de prs est constitus met en la crre qu'Averroes a choisi ces exemples (...) pour montrer aux lecteurs traditionalistes la faussetologiens contre la logique des philosophes. L'Appendice dievaux des commentaires d'Averroes ont , aussi, frapp relatifs ation du monde. (shrink)

This report of the Commission for Jewish Philosophy is based on information and personal bibliographies sent to the President of the Commission by over forty scholars in the field via the Questionnaire for SIEPM Commission Reports. Like the previous report that appeared in the Bulletin de philosophie médiévale 49 , 27-44, it is thus intended to be representative and not at all exhaustive. The report features a selected bibliography, arranged alphabetically by author, of over two hundred studies in the field (...) of medieval Jewish Philosophy, written in Western languages between the years 2008-2012. In addition, it provides a list of editions and translations in the field that have appeared during this period, as well as a list of Ph.D. dissertations in the field. The report also mentions some of the most important international conferences that have taken place, and some of the major projects. In general, the authors have tried to present a picture of the study of medieval Jewish Philosophy over the past five years, what has been its focus, what it has accomplished, and where it seems to be going. Finally, the authors address certain important issues that were raised at the meeting of the Commission for Jewish Philosophy at the 2012 SIEPM Congress in Freising. (shrink)

Shem-Tov Falaquera (c. 1225-1295) was a student of the writings of Maimonides and a leading expositor of the medieval Islamic and Jewish philosophical traditions. His Epistle of the Debate (Iggeret ha-Vikkuah) is a delightful dialogue between two Jews, one learned in philosophy and the other not, about the permissibility and desirability of philosophical investigation by Jews. It is perhaps the most important medieval text devoted to the theme of the relationship between reason and religion by a Jewish thinker, and it (...) is an excellent introduction to Jewish philosophy. This volume contains the first critical edition of the Hebrew text of the Epistle of the Debate and an annotated English translation, the first into a modern language. The volume also includes essays on the sources of the Epistle and on Falaquera's position on the relation between reason and religion. (shrink)

Abū Bakr Ibn Ṭufayl was one of three great Islamic Peripatetics of Andalusia, sandwiched between Ibn Bājja for whom he had both highest encomia and biting censure, and his own illustrious protégé, Ibn Rushd. Yet only one philosophic work survives by Ibn Ṭufayl, the wondrous novella, Ḥayy Ibn Yaq ẓān, about an autodidact on a deserted island, who comes to learn almost all things through the use of reason alone. The present book by Taneli Kukkonen offers a welcome introduction to (...) Ḥayy Ibn Yaq ẓān and the thought of Ibn Ṭufayl. It appears in Patricia Crone’s Makers of the Muslim World series, which strives to “combine first-rate scholarship with a strong... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Otot ha-Shamayim: Samuel Ibn Tibbon’s Hebrew Version of Aristotle’s “Meteorology.” by AristotleSteven HarveyAristotle. Otot ha-Shamayim: Samuel Ibn Tibbon’s Hebrew Version of Aristotle’s “Meteorology.” Translated and edited by Resianne Fontaine. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1995. Pp. lxxx + 268. Cloth, $108.50.This modest, seemingly unimportant, volume is in fact a surprisingly fascinating text that should be of interest to all historians of philosophy. Under the rather boring guise of an edition (...) and English translation of a medieval Hebrew translation of an early ninth-century Arabic translation of Aristotle’s Meteorology, this book is destined to be ignored by most historians of philosophy and even by those who have a special interest in Aristotle. This is a shame, and it is the goal of this brief review to alert the reader to the book’s value.The Hebrew translation of the Meteorology is, to be more precise, a creative translation of an inadequate Arabic version of the text, corrected, interpreted, and expanded on the basis of the commentaries of Alexander of Aphrodisias and Averroes, by a philosopher struggling to understand what was for him a seminal text of Aristotle’s. The philosopher-translator was Samuel Ibn Tibbon, best known for his faithful translation into Hebrew of Maimonides’s Guide of the Perplexed. What is immediately significant about the translation of the Meteorology, which was completed in 1210, is that it was the first text of Aristotle’s to be translated into Hebrew and, as far as is known, the first Hebrew translation of any philosophic or scientific work of a non-Jew. For the philosophically inclined Jew who did not know Arabic and who had struggled through Maimonides’s Guide without the benefit of translations, paraphrases, or even commentaries on Aristotle’s Physics and other prerequisite writings on natural science, the translation must have been an eagerly awaited and much welcome work. But why, of all things, the historian of philosophy will ask, the Meteorology? And however much appreciated the translation may have been in 1210, what possible use could an English translation of this patchwork Hebrew translation of a garbled and abridged Arabic translation of perhaps a Syriac translation of the Greek original or compendium of the Meteorology have for us today when we have a fine Greek edition of the text and modern translations from that edition?There were good reasons not to translate the Meteorology first. In contrast to most of Aristotle’s writings on natural science which existed in impressively reliable Arabic translations, the Meteorology existed in a poor and incomplete one. Ibn Tibbon comments in his Introduction to the translation that “errors and omissions” in the Arabic translation are evident from the context, from a comparison with Alexander’s commentary and the lemmata found therein, and from a comparison with other Aristotelian works that existed in trustworthy translations. The text could not simply be translated, [End Page 130] but needed to be reconstructed on the basis of a careful study of the commentaries of Alexander of Aphrodisias, Averroes, and the other commentaries that were available. Yet, even if the text had existed in a reliable translation, the tradition of text-study required that the sciences be studied in a proper order and this meant—as is clear from the opening words of the Meteorology—beginning the study of natural sciences with the Physics and turning to the Meteorology only after completing On the Heavens and On Generation and Corruption. Ibn Tibbon acknowledged this, and, in fact, interjected in his own name (27, 29) that “all the statements the philosopher has [made] thus far, are introductory remarks taken from earlier discussions in other books.... Someone who has not previously acquired knowledge and learning from his books that precede this one, will understand very little of this introduction.” Unfortunately for Ibn Tibbon’s reader, it would be forty years before any of those books or epitomes of them would be translated into Hebrew. Resianne Fontaine, in her wide-ranging and informative Introduction (xi–xii), brings support for A. Ravitzky’s suggestion that Ibn Tibbon’s decision to translate the Meteorology was motivated by his personal interest in the text... (shrink)

In 1978 the American Research Center in Egypt published a report on a project in "Medieval Islamic Logic" it was cosponsoring with the Smithsonian Institute. The report announced the project's goal to be "to produce critical editions of the Arabic text of Averroes' Middle Commentaries on Aristotle's logical works." The first of these editions, the Middle Commentary on Aristotle's Topics, appeared in 1979, and since that time the editions have appeared with impressive regularity: the MC on Aristotle's Categories in 1980; (...) the MC on Aristotle's De Interpretatione in 1981; the MC on Aristotle's Posterior Analytics in 1982; and the MC on Aristotle's Prior Analytics in 1983. The editor of all these commentaries is Charles E. Butterworth, with editorial assistance from Ahmad Abd al-Magid Haridi. The editions of these eight commentaries, when they are all published, will constitute the Arabic version of the middle commentaries of volume 1 of Harry A. Wolfson's carefully planned Corpus Commentariorum Averrois in Aristotelem. (shrink)